• Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
  • Categories
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Juvenile
  • Courts
    • Supreme
    • Appeals
    • Tax
    • SCOTUS
    • 7th Circuit
  • Judges

Case Clips

Published by the Indiana Office of Court Services

Civil

Paloutzian v. Taggart, No. 49A02-0908-CV-817, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 13, 2010)

August 16, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik, T. Crone

The 2003 amendment to Ind. Code § 30-4-2.1-2, which abrogated the stranger to the adoption rule, applies retroactively to a trust created in 1953 before the settlor’s son adopted two children.

Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Brough, No. 88A01-0911-CV-550, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 26, 2010)

July 30, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Sharpnack

Trial court erred in vacating its order for arbitration, because the arbitration clause in the parties’ contract was not terminated by one party’s bankruptcy discharge.

Spangler v. Bechtel, No. 49A05-0908-CV-482, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 27, 2010)

July 30, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown

Mother who suffered a stillbirth due to medical malpractice qualified as an injured patient and satisfied the actual victim requirement under the Medical Malpractice Act regardless of whether the malpractice resulted in injuries to the mother, the fetus, or both, and Parents may assert a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress under the modified impact rule.

Adoption of H.W., No. 71A03-0911-CV-516, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 28, 2010)

July 30, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Barnes

Trial court had the ability to consider simultaneously both the CHINS action and the Foster Parents’ petition to adopt Child; trial court erred, however, when it determined that DCS’s withholding of consent to the adoption was not in Child’s best interest.

Vest v. State, No. 49A02-0912-CR-1276, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 21, 2010)

July 23, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Resisting efforts of several police officers to make an arrest was a single offense, not three, of resisting law enforcement, so that there was no need for a “unanimity” instruction requiring jurors to agree that a particular officer’s efforts were resisted.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 225
  • Go to page 226
  • Go to page 227
  • Go to page 228
  • Go to page 229
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 256
  • Go to Next Page »

Footer

About

Case Clips is a weekly publication of the Indiana Office of Court Services featuring appellate opinions curated by IOCS staff for Indiana judges.

Subscribe
  • Flickr
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Archive

Copyright © 2025 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs